CFMOTO 450 Ibex

[XLsior]

[Sport Rider]

reviews I've seen so far put the CFM slightly ahead of the Himi 452. although most are saying you couldn't go wrong with either one.

At this point though, I'm sticking with my KLR. my gen 1 has comparable weight and comparable power/torque. But the KLR makes it a bit lower. What I don't get is a 6th gear though.

That only becomes a question of how one would use the bike. I would submit that anyone buying this size of bike shouldn't be planning to do long highway miles to get to riding locations. Yes, it can, but it won't be comfortable to the rider. Nor will the motor hold up as long under such abuse.

my 2 cents won't buy a cup of coffee though.

[XLsior]

My RE and CFmoto dealer has stated that the Himmy isn't selling while the MT450 is in high demand.


If you want the RE single cylinder and better fuel economy then perhaps yes...


But if I am going to be spending this much I'll take the 270 crank twin. Having test rode it I see no issue doing highway distances with normal rest stops. Most are switching out the 14t front for a 15t to keep motorway speeds at about 5000rpm, so I would not call it abuse in any way...

Though I wish the choice between the factory low seat and high seat was not an optional extra.


If you have a KLR650 already then I don't see any reason to switch either...

[Sport Rider]

I swapped the sprocket on my KLR because I was using it to commute to work on the interstates. the downside is the gearing isn't as good for slow speed work. the only option I see is to take extra sprockets along and do field service when I get to my destination. Same may be true of the 450. I don't see a problem with doing that, but it is a little bit of nuisance. it's the only way I can think of to have the best of both worlds.

[Sport Rider]

Here in my area I'm seeing the Himalayan selling for 5799. as it's a dealer, I'm assuming that does not include freight/setup.

no actual prices on the MCM yet but the web site says 6499 plus freight/setup.

That shows be a $700 difference between the bikes. But the Himi price is the cheapest I found on Cycle Trader and the dealer is only 190 miles away from me. Not sure if MCM dealers will be showing any discounts (likely not initially given all the hype).

[XLsior]

Correct the himmy450 is slightly cheaper.



But people are not buying it here in Australia.

[GlennR]

It's nice to have so many choices.

[ProDigit]

Originally Posted by XLsior

My RE and CFmoto dealer has stated that the Himmy isn't selling while the MT450 is in high demand.


If you want the RE single cylinder and better fuel economy then perhaps yes...


But if I am going to be spending this much I'll take the 270 crank twin. Having test rode it I see no issue doing highway distances with normal rest stops. Most are switching out the 14t front for a 15t to keep motorway speeds at about 5000rpm, so I would not call it abuse in any way...

Though I wish the choice between the factory low seat and high seat was not an optional extra.


If you have a KLR650 already then I don't see any reason to switch either...

Swapping out the 14t for an 18t, and the rear sprocket from a 41 to a 38, allows for highway rides at 5k rpm.
Other than that, it'll be 6k rpm with a 17/38.
And the 45 real mpg isn't particularly good. That's on the nk, so the Mt should get even less.

I hear the 700cl-x gets just 36mpg. Ridiculous.

[TominMO]

14 & 41 gives a 1:2.92 ratio.
18 & 38 gives a 1:2.11 ratio.
That is so tall that first gear starts might be an issue; and probably top gear would be only useful for level cruising.
16 & 41 might be a better first try, then go to a 38 if still needed.

[XLsior]

a 15t front sprocket is $20 from ali express and for most riders is enough for 100kph highway speeds.



Nathan the postman claims 75mpg for the 450mt and 100mpg+ for the Himmy 452. Though that might be UK imperial gallons.



I doubt they would be worse than a carburaterd CG250

[XLsior]

article suggest 5.6lt per 100km or 42mpg



https://amcn.com.au/editorial/2024-cfmoto-450mt/


Australian Rider/comments sections suggests 3-4lt per 100km So closer to 50-60mpg.





So getting about 3 times the power of a cg250 that can do highway speeds comfortably at a minor increase in fuel consumption but a 17lt tank from factory...


If that engine sound hurts gas mileage then I'll take the hit.

[ProDigit]

Originally Posted by TominMO

14 & 41 gives a 1:2.92 ratio.
18 & 38 gives a 1:2.11 ratio.
That is so tall that first gear starts might be an issue; and probably top gear would be only useful for level cruising.
16 & 41 might be a better first try, then go to a 38 if still needed.

First gear starts are no issues on the 18/38.
Just don't expect to do any wheelies with it.
The clutch is very slippery, and starts are very easy.
Idle rpm speed in 1st gear is 10mph, which is slightly on the high side.
Most smaller cc bikes hover between 4 to 8mph at idle.
One could install a 20t up front (there is enough space for it) and probably still start fine in 1st gear.
However, like I said in my other thread on the 450nk, 18/38t is unnecessary large. 6th gear only uses 4-5k rpm band (up to 6k rpm if you tuck or with a tail wind). A 17/38 should be much closer to ideal gearing (close to top speed in 6th gear) but requires you to break the chain and cut out a link.
For the ibex with wind shield and taller suspension (more wind buffeting) you may want to stick with an 17/41 or 16/38 as gear setup.
The first requires you to add a link or two to the chain, the second, cut a link or two.


The bike usually tops out at around 80mph in 6th, I think the ibex will be closer to 75mph with an 18/38t.

You're really not going to get fantastic mpgs out of this bike anyway.
The internal mpg counter may say close to 70mpg with an 18/38t setup when cruising, but the pump indicated that was a lie. 45-50 at best!

[Texas Pete]

Originally Posted by XLsior

In that video, the owner had only used his very first tank of gas and not broken in the motor. He reported 4.1 l/100k on average from his bike's computer. That's pretty good. In yank terms that 4.1 l/100km = 57.37 mpg

[ProDigit]

Originally Posted by Texas Pete

In that video, the owner had only used his very first tank of gas and not broken in the motor. He reported 4.1 l/100k on average from his bike's computer. That's pretty good. In yank terms that 4.1 l/100km = 57.37 mpg

The bikes computer and what you actually fuel up at the pump are 2 different readouts.

[XLsior]

I can assure Mr digit that reporting me, because I make you uncomfortable will not work out well for you and

does not justify your accusation of me having alter egos/accounts...


I am not the 1 hiding behind a false construct/mask.


I've crawled out of ditch and saved a bike from the scrap heap to get here with a 5 star thread, over 120k views, over 2 years with just pure grit and determination...


No alter Egos or shadow accounts... Just good old fashioned honesty and a heart on a sleeve...



If you try and push me back into the ditch don't be surprised if you fall into yourself.